From a person who mainly uses English even though I have the minimum knowledge to correctly pronounce pinyin including "ü", using "v" to represent "ü" is disastrous and shall be avoid. Here is why:

1. Any persons who do not know Chinese will eventually mispronounce this "COMPLETELY".
2. Even though "yu" does also lead into mispronunciation, HOWEVER, it still at least makes, even if slightly, more sense for most non-Chinese speakers.

Also, just as Peppy has already said,

peppy wrote:

romanisation isn't for the people that speak the language. it is for people that can't who wish to (as accurately as possible) pronounce and process what they are reading.

...if native people are offended, they can turn off roman display.

I will not bring the fact that he clearly supports the "yu"'s side, but only what I want to point out here.

ROMANIZATION is NOT for native speakers. As a Thai, if for any reasons I'm trying to search for a Thai song, I wouldn't bother using a single Latin characters. Instead, I would rather use Thai characters. I believe that Using characters in the desired language is certainly easier than trying to use Latin characters. Henceforth, this should also apply to native speakers(in this case are Chineses) when trying to search for something WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGES (again, Chinese for this debate).

If you were to ask me if I'm offended when a Thai song is misinterpreted due to romanization, I would answer "no" without hesitation, and I strongly hope ALL NATIVE SPEAKERS feel the same when they see their own languages being misinterpreted.

Still, if native speakers are feeling offended due to their language being mispronounced or whatsoever, they have the option to turn off romanization which has also already been mentioned by Peppy.

PS. The fact that I keep mentioning Chinese isn't because I hold my grudge against them, but due to Chinese being the main discussed topic here. Being honest, I feel like all native speakers should feel the same toward "romanization".

SupaJuke wrote:

ROMANIZATION is NOT for native speakers.

essentially this

ROMANIZATION is NOT for English speakers to pronounce.

^^^^essentially this

you guys are saying to teach osu player wrong things about Chinese and will make no way for them to find the song by title. Realize it.

Romanization (also spelled romanisation: see spelling differences), in linguistics, is the conversion of writing from a different writing system to the Roman (Latin) script, or a system for doing so. Methods of romanization include transliteration, for representing written text, and transcription, for representing the spoken word, and combinations of both. Transcription methods can be subdivided into phonemic transcription, which records the phonemes or units of semantic meaning in speech, and more strict phonetic transcription, which records speech sounds with precision.

it actually is for Latin alphabet speaker's to pronounce, not Chinese, unfortunately;

Mentai wrote:

Romanization (also spelled romanisation: see spelling differences), in linguistics, is the conversion of writing from a different writing system to the Roman (Latin) script, or a system for doing so. Methods of romanization include transliteration, for representing written text, and transcription, for representing the spoken word, and combinations of both. Transcription methods can be subdivided into phonemic transcription, which records the phonemes or units of semantic meaning in speech, and more strict phonetic transcription, which records speech sounds with precision.

it actually is for Latin alphabet speaker's to pronounce, not Chinese, unfortunately;

and if a player want to find the song by romanized title, ask google do they accept this proposal

Shad0w1and wrote:

ROMANIZATION is NOT for English speakers to pronounce.

^^^^essentially this

you guys are saying to teach osu player wrong things about Chinese and will make them find no way to find the song. Realize it.

For this to eventually be solved, we have to discuss whether we want to write the metadata according to how it is "pronounced", or "used".

If you want it to be written according to how it is actually used by natives (Chinese), then I wouldn't argue that certainly "v" is better.

However, from my point of view, a non-native speaker, I prefer the metadata to be something readable for me. Even if it would be different from how native speakers actually use when typing/writing in roman.

Shad0w1and wrote:

Mentai wrote:

Romanization (also spelled romanisation: see spelling differences), in linguistics, is the conversion of writing from a different writing system to the Roman (Latin) script, or a system for doing so. Methods of romanization include transliteration, for representing written text, and transcription, for representing the spoken word, and combinations of both. Transcription methods can be subdivided into phonemic transcription, which records the phonemes or units of semantic meaning in speech, and more strict phonetic transcription, which records speech sounds with precision.

it actually is for Latin alphabet speaker's to pronounce, not Chinese, unfortunately;

and if a player want to find the song by romanized title, ask google do they accept this proposal

this is literally the issue at hand. the point is that we are valuing actual articulation higher than transliteration. there is a solution for both. having the metadata be the phonetic articulation for Latin alphabet speakers, but also requiring to have the exact Chinese transliteration in the tags. and this would work, but we don't know what to use other than "v." if we could find a happy middle ground for pronunciation between us (that being, non-native Chinese speakers and native Chinese speakers), then the problem would be resolved both ways

please be a bit open minded in respect to how vowels are treated in Latin-based languages

SupaJuke wrote:

Shad0w1and wrote:

ROMANIZATION is NOT for English speakers to pronounce.

^^^^essentially this

you guys are saying to teach osu player wrong things about Chinese and will make them find no way to find the song. Realize it.

For this to eventually be solved, we have to discuss whether we want to write the metadata according to how it is "pronounced", or "used".

If you want it to be written according to how it is actually used by natives (Chinese), then I wouldn't argue that certainly "v" is better.

However, from my point of view, a non-native speaker, I prefer the metadata to be something readable for me. Even if it would be different from how native speakers actually use when typing/writing in roman.

idc about native language or not, I am saying you cannot just make a standard which no one outside of osu will accept. that will just fuck up everyone who wants to know about the song on google. I personally is fine with Lv write as Lu because it is searchable. but Lyu is like a joke. no one will now know which song is it.

at the end, I can't see other options than these two:
Title: Nv Ren Hua, Tags: Nu
Title: Nu Ren Hua, Tags: Nv
Other options are not viable, just because it won't help to identify the song in any database or search engine.

Shad0w1and wrote:

at the end, I can't see other options than these two:
Title: Nv Ren Hua, Tags: Nu
Title: Nu Ren Hua, Tags: Nv
Other options are not viable, just because it won't help to identify the song in any database or search engine.

if this is actually viable, i think the second option would be a perfect compromise between articulation, and allowing for the full transliterated string to be found

Shad0w1and wrote:

idc about native language or not, I am saying you cannot just make a standard which no one outside of osu will accept. that will just fuck up everyone who wants to know about the song on google. I personally is fine with Lv write as Lu because it is searchable. but Lyu is like a joke. no one will now know which song is it.

at the end, I can't see other options than these two:
Title: Nv Ren Hua, Tags: Nu
Title: Nu Ren Hua, Tags: Nv
Other options are not viable, just because it won't help to identify the song in any database or search engine.

Actually, some songs that are not really famous, that had to be Romanised by osu! community alone, can't be found by using the Romanised name. Why don't you just copy the original title and search for that? It would actually be best if the original title was available on the website, but you can still find any song as the original title must be here.

And I'm not sure what is wrong with your Google results, because it seems to have found the songs properly using the "yu" version, at least on my end. But even then, don't forget that you still can add artist to the search. The probability that "yu" will be in all of the characters (of both artist and title) is very improbable and copying both artist and the title should find the song even if one character is missing. For example this map can be found by just typing "stefanie guang", not even her full name is required. I think you're making it look more problematic than it is.

du ju rilli vant piipell tu vrait hauv dei pronauns vørds in inglisj in anådder længguej?

I mean, probably not. We don't transcribe how we pronounce things from one Latin-Alphabet using language to English, and I'm sure people of native English would have a headache reading my "norwegianization" of an Englsh sentence. It's probably a similar feeling many Chinese people are having about this change when they already have a system they use that uses Latin characters (thus making people able to write and communicate which song they mean) properly that works fine except for the one pronounciation of v, which is already a common problem of any other language than English using the Latin Alphabet.

The amount of time being thrown at one character when there's obviously a divide in decision which is *not* going to be resolved is insane.

What's the biggest site on the internet that shows romanisation? Wikipedia? Let's use what they use and call it a day.


It doesn't matter which we choose if we're going for conformity. People will get used to it.

Let's stop this and copy the most settled upon solution elsewhere on the internet.

I will be removing any posts that aren't references to other sites using romanisation in a specific way. Let's find the most popular method and use it.

I guess most players in osu! are using keyboard to input and search so I just put link here about the most popular method via keyboard, not by writing on papers or others.

peppy wrote:

Let's find the most popular method and use it.

Okay then simple answer: v is the most popular amongst players.

Wikipedia wrote:

Since the letter "v" is unused in Mandarin pinyin, it is universally used as an alias for ü.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinyin_input_method )

Also one more link:
https://eastasiastudent.net/china/manda ... yin-input/

I'm not talking about typing. You can search using the actual non-romanised charactres. Please read my last post again – I'm talking about display on websites.

If we can go back to something close to a romanization standard for "reading" from the library of congress, they choose to use the double dotted u, which is reasonable. It'll be kind of like placing accents on french words.

https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/romanization/chinese.pdf

The most readable would be this. Maybe we can do something in the search engine side to automatically let both be searched for with u and v. This is a quality of life improvement for non-chinese speakers. You would otherwise be forced to copy and paste to search.

...or we can accept romanization doesn't work perfectly for many languages including chinese, and just use the normal/most popular/most sane latin standard (v) like we would for many other languages.

What Nyquill and CXu post do make sense here, romanization doesn't work perfectly for many language, the double dotted u is even kept until now. In the old latin systems "v" and "u" are interchangable. I believe "v" is the most appropriate and popular choice. In youtube search system, "Lv" is obviously better keyword than "Lyu"(try search "Lv Guang"). Using the English name of citzen in passport is one-sided (passport are mostly customs, while our romansation are for players who use computer everyday)

Let's try to fix the proposal again:




The discussion of "Romanisation of Chinese" should be adequate and stopped now. Anyone has concerns are free to contact me for detail explanations.

Wikipedia uses ü is most cases because it has no limitation about umlauts.
The only place where Romanised names are displayed and have the same umlaut limitation is the passport which is basically like this

Fycho wrote:

Lü, Nü, Lüe, and Nüe must be substituted with Lyu, Nyu, Lue, and Nue respectively.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lü_(surname) << on wikipedia about Lü, a common surname. Read under the Romanization section.
(in Chinese) Standards set in 2012 about Romanization of Chinese names in passports.
吕女绿 (Lü Nü Lü) should be Romanised as LYU NYU LYU

if that passport romanisation is actually the case, then that's enough precedent set for the use of "yu" over "v", it would seem

"v" is not and will not ever be a valid transliteration in english for this particular because its sound is not really approaching "vuh" or "vee". "yu" is closer to the actual overall sound ("yuU") - romanising by IME precedent is ugly in a number of cases even if it is technically easier to search for

peppy wrote:

I'm not talking about typing. You can search using the actual non-romanised charactres. Please read my last post again – I'm talking about display on websites.

Except this whole debate is because there is no definite way people romanize ü. If there was, this debate would have been over centuries ago. You talk about display on websites, but every website will display it as ü.

The best solution for this would to be to allow ü in the romanization field. Why aren't we allowed to use accented characters in that field in the first place? There are more scenarios besides the Chinese ü where this becomes a problem. (Example: https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/740535#osu/1562308 Only reason this needed to be romanized is because of the umlaut a, as the artist's name is Mäe, but really we should have just had Mäe without a need for romanization)

peppy wrote:

It doesn't matter which we choose if we're going for conformity. People will get used to it.

Let's stop this and copy the most settled upon solution elsewhere on the internet.

Please make it easy for us to use accented characters in the metadata then. The solution is there, but it requires the staff's help, honestly.

Ephemeral wrote:

if that passport romanisation is actually the case, then that's enough precedent set for the use of "yu" over "v", it would seem



"v" is not and will not ever be a valid transliteration in english for this particular because its sound is not really approaching "vuh" or "vee". "yu" is closer to the actual overall sound ("yuU") - romanising by IME precedent is ugly in a number of cases even if it is technically easier to search for

You bring up passports, but that is the only scenario where "yu" is used. Chinese passports have used "v" as well, and it is up to the passport holder if they want to keep it as-is or change it to "yu" The only reason this is a thing is because they can't use ü on a passport, but really the easiest solution would be to update their system to allow ü on passports.

Seriously, the best solution is to just allow ü and other accented characters in the romanization field. Basically all websites use ü, there is no reason for us to be stuck in this debate when typing ü on a computer is so easy.

cleaning up open points in progress

open talking points

• 
  Chinese:
  

1. i'm not willing to link a 4 year old thread on the ranking criteria. either it should be ported to the wiki or that sentence dropped or its information condensed down into more guidelines on the topic
2. Hanyu Pinyin system needs an external reference if available, someone please provide me a link

Cyrillic:

1. Cyricllic is now undefined - anyone fancy coming up with some definition if the current thing only works for russian?

Korean:

1. Input from Koreans as to which standard is used and should be used going forward is needed

Thai

1. Input from natives required as to which standard is to be used

Arabic

1. do we currently need this? I have a hard time telling how much monstrata trolls in this post

TV Size label

1. FORCE the same way or FORCE DROPPING the label?

will update with issues i have as i go through the thread updating open points

Monstrata wrote:

With respects to Korean romanization, I'm wondering if we should continue applying the McCune-Reischauer system for romanizing Korean. This is the system that the Library of Congress is using. Nyquill brought up an excellent point about using romanization systems that other large institutions are currently using and it works a lot better than creating our own modified system in most cases (unless we are simplifying).

I'm bringing this up because there is also the Revised Romanization of Hangeul system that was introduced on July 7th, 2000 which has been applied to various Korean road signs transportations etc... The major change of course being that the new system eliminates diacritics in favor of digraphs.

A possible rule would look like:

Songs with Korean metadata must be romanised using the McCune-Reischauer system for romanizing Korean when there is no romanisation or translation information listed by a reputable source. The same applies to the Source field if a romanised Source is preferred by the mapper.

Additionally, we could introduce the use of digraphs and two-vowel letters into the proposal:

Vowels /ʌ/ and ㅡ/ɯ/ should be written as digraphs in Korean romanization, and romanized to eo and eu respectively.

Another language to examine is Thai. The Library of Congress recommends nine additional rules for Thai romanization which are:

Library of Congress wrote:

Romanization
1. Tonal marks are not romanized.
2. The symbol ฯ indicates omission and is shown in romanization by “ … ” the conventional sign for
ellipsis.
3. When the repeat symbol ๆ is used, the syllable is repeated in romanization.
4. The symbol ฯลฯ is romanized Ia.
5. Thai consonants are sometimes purely consonantal and sometimes followed by an inherent vowel
romanized o, a, or ǭ depending on the pronunciation as determined from an authoritative
dictionary, such as the Royal Institute's latest edition (1999).
6. Silent consonants, with their accompanying vowels, if any, are not romanized.
7. When the pronunciation requires one consonant to serve a double function – at the end of
one syllable and the beginning of the next – it is romanized twice according to the
respective values.
8. The numerals are: ๐ (0), ๑ (1), ๒ (2), ๓ (3), ๔ (4), ๕ (5), ๖ (6), ๗ (7), ๘ (8), and ๙ (9).
9. In Thai, words are not written separately. In romanization, however, text is divided into words
according to the guidelines provided in Word Division below.

The two rules I am proposing are:

Songs with Thai metadata must be romanised using the Library of Congress system (also known as ISO 11940) for romanizing Thai when there is no romanisation or translation information listed by a reputable source. The same applies to the Source field if a romanised Source is preferred by the mapper.

and

In the romanization of Thai, words should be romanized separately, and separated by a space. Additionally, all words should (or should not?) be uppercased.

Attached are helpful transcription keys for Thai:






Another language that is becoming more and more relevant is Arabic, and there are some issues I would like to bring forth with regards to its romanization.

Here is the table for romanization of Arabic:


As you can see, some issues come up. In the romanization of ص ص ص ص for example, (whether initial, Medial, Final, or Alone) the romanization becomes " ṣ" however, the diacritical mark is not something that can be used by osu because it is still not unicode. I would like to propose that all of these diacritical "," attached to letters be removed for the sake of simplicity and because osu currently does not support them. Therefore something like " ص◌نضوِ◌خ" should be romanized as "sandwich".

Another problem with Arabic is that it is typed in reverse, right to left. Should we also apply this to romanization? In this case "ص◌نضوِ◌خ" would actually be romanized as "hciwdnas" when read left to right as English readers are expected to do.

The rule I am proposing is:

Songs with Arabic metadata must be romanised using the Library of Congress system for romanizing Arabic when there is no romanisation or translation information listed by a reputable source. The same applies to the Source field if a romanised Source is preferred by the mapper.

Additionally:

In the romanization of Arabic, words should be romanized in verse order, and the last letter should be be uppercased. For example in romanizing "◌ س◌ !" the correct romanization should be "!usO"

However, there is also the problem of Judeo-Arabic romanization which differs slightly from traditional Arabic romanization. Judeo-Arabic of course, stems from the Jewish Arabs many who live in Iraq and have adopted a slightly different script with respect to certain nouns and verbs. The most common Jewish Arabs are those from Baghdad. Anyways, I digress.

Attached are examples of Judei-Arabic romanziation:


So I would like to propose the following:

Songs with Judeo-Arabic metadata must be romanised using the Library of Congress system for romanizing Judeo-Arabic where Judeo-Arabic nouns and verbs are being used, and where there is no romanisation or translation information listed by a reputable source. Where Judeo-Arabic words and phrases are not used, traditional Arabic romanization will apply. The same applies to the Source field if a romanised Source is preferred by the mapper.

i'm very unsure about these things, can someone with knowledge of the language please clear this up?
find me a song with aegyptic hieroglyphs first that is sung in the language and mapped on osu, i dont think a language with 300k tribal speakers worldwide is relevant to the ranking criteria

-----------

TV Size labels in title: drop universally or force the same labeling on all tv size songs?

-----------

Applied Sieg changes to russian as they were.

draft updated, refer to open talking points

Okoratu wrote:

i'm very unsure about these things, can someone with knowledge of the language please clear this up?
find me a song with aegyptic hieroglyphs first that is sung in the language and mapped on osu, i dont think a language with 300k tribal speakers worldwide is relevant to the ranking criteria

-----------

TV Size labels in title: drop universally or force the same labeling on all tv size songs?

1. I agree this may not be very necessary. I'd say we should only require usage of certain Romanisation method only if the language needs to be Romanised repetitively, not once per history of the game.

2. In my opinion (and this is probably only about opinion), drop it and recommend it to tags. If we use a universal label, I feel like it goes completely against what the artist has chosen. If it is removed, it's not really misrepresenting the artist's choice, it is just us not considering it as a part of the title. Not sure if this makes much sense to anyone else, that's just what I think. Edit: Another important point is that, because people like 1-2 min. songs, they will be encouraged to use the in-game song length sorting/grouping (unfortunately can't be done on website). Most people probably search for short songs just by using "tv size", which can omit a large portion of maps they could actually enjoy. (There's nothing magical about TV Size songs, the only thing is that they are ~1 min 30 sec, it's just the length that players care about.) As people would get used to it, it could actually be more beneficial. (afaik Ephemeral (sorry if it wasn't you, but I think it was) said he would rename all the songs that are any kind of TV Size, so that it's consistent, so people actually would get used to it)

Chinese: Couldn't really find a reference that would not be misleading. They are usually too much concerned about the pronunciation part and don't really tell you how to Romanise it. Plus, many of them use the originally proposed style (not syllable by syllable, but "word" by "word"). Many are paid or blocked by government too for some reason. Someone may need to search a bit more to represent the currently intended system better.

Cyrillic: Wouldn't really care that much for Cyrillic as it's improbable that there will be many songs in it. But it could be recommended to use the BGN/PCGN systems for other Cyrillic. The reason being pretty simple, it's nearly the same as the Russian one. Yes, it is intended majorly for geographic names, but it was explained in past that it was the most common way we see Cyrillic Romanised and is the most compatible with modified Hepburn, which is the most spread Romanisation in osu!. It also avoided the confusion between "ch" and "kh", between "j" and "y", between "c" and "ts" etc. Could elaborate this a bit more if needed.

Korean: I believe the currently used system is "Revised Romanisation of Korean", at least it looks pretty much like it in the maps here. It's a South Korean standard (probably the one we should follow as the probability of North Korean songs being mapped here is very low). Didn't find an official document about it, but this seems like a nice reference. It explains all the things you need for Romanisation. Except for Hanja, but again, the probability of something with Hanja being mapped is low. May need input from Koreans, I haven't seen any problems with the current system.

That's my opinion at this moment.

Delete word-by-word lol

Sites on the Internet unfortunately either provide too much (ea. joining of syllables) or isn't at all what we agree on.
If we are going with passport stuff imo just port information in the box below to the wiki. It's pretty similar to the old thread with clearer and better wording and all irrelevant points dropped.


In the RC itself
^ use "substituted" here. ü is already Romanised but we're just replacing it with stuff because of umlauts.

Force the same Tv Size label, since it's easier to identify the lengh of the song and if it's the opening of an anime, also everyone in osu! is used to it, removing it will just cause some confusion IMO.

Every Cyrillic translation system is a mess, and have large inconsistencies in vowel treatment as well. I recommend using either right single quotation system, either ISO 9985 or BGN/PCGN. ISO is the most widely used for us Armenians, but having the aspirates translated the same way makes BGN/PCGN a more universal solution for all Cyrillic languages.

basically, BGN/PCGN is probably the best for a universal system for Cyrillic

How should one romanize the title, if romanization, or even unambiguous phonetic transcription, doesn't exist, while several completely different ones are suggested to equally be such, while at the same time it would be completely, totally and absolutely wrong to choose just one of them as a title? I.e. it's not possible to transcribe in phonetic way (or romanize) the title, unless you include all of the several possible meanings? And even should one include all of them, should it be done by separating them by slash symbol, which in case of 4-5 of them would result in terribly long monstrosity king of a gore titles?

-----

Here's more of explanation:


Artists can name their songs however they want, right? They are not obliged to make it "possible" to pronounce or to have unambiguous title that someone can phonetise.

I don't know how it looks like in Chinese language, but a great deal of Japanese kanji characters can be pronounced (and romanized) not in one or two, but even several completely different ways!

I don't know, if someone made song like this, but I find nothing that could stop one from doing this, i.e. what if someone makes the song (which later someone decides to map in osu!), where:

[*] Title have no official romanization and remains "unspoken", i.e. aside of the title written in kanji, even the author never spells if and refers to the song only indirectly in words, unless by writing it or showing the kanji characters.

[*] It have several possible meanings, at least 3-4 of them, and of which ALL are suggested by the lyrics and ALL of them have COMPLETELY DIFFERENT romanization in regards to every single character used in the title. So, you can't phonetise it, as it have several, completely different phonetisations!!

[*] Lyrics of the song are used to maintain and express the ambiguity, creating a contradiction around what the title applies or refers to, making all of these "possible titles" to be "equal" on terms of being the possible title, while at the same time even contradicting each other, either by their contradictory meanings and/or by the lyrics, i.e. all of them are suggested to be the title, while at the same time being refuted from being so.

[*] It all have sense, while reading the kanji characters and extracting all these meaning, definitely making the title to fit into being the title of the song perfectly (!!!), with just one but: you can't possibly spell it or phonetise it, as it have several completely different pronounciations, as all of them can be equally considering as being and not-being (because of contradictory situation and being refuted by other meanings and/or lyrics) the title.

-----

So, each of these "possible titles" can be and can't (!) be the title at the same time, but all of them written down with the very same kanji characters are definitely the title, which deep meanings that are expressed in the lyrics.

-----

How should metadata for such song look like?

I don't know, if such song with "unspoken" title, where the title can have multiple meanings, currently exists, and if so, then to what extreme this ambiguity is brought, but there are titles with more than one meaning and sometimes you can't really find anywhere how the title should be pronounced or phonetised...

Also, looking at this discussion, even if such song doesn't exist, then depending on the answer I could decide to spend my time to improve my poor Japanese much better and eventually create one in future, maybe with some voluntary help of someone, just for the sake of trying to rank it in future

-----

But seriously... it's not required from an artist to have a title that is possible to be phonetised or romanized... what should a mapper do in such situation? Could such song be treated as an "exception" and allowed to have no romanization? Or all of several titles should be included in some ultimate title compilation?

And please, don't tell me that it's "impossible case" that's not worth considering, as I believe that the people in this community could definitely help to make it possible, if it will be required to.

Scarlet Evans wrote:

Could such song be treated as an "exception" and allowed to have no romanization? Or all of several titles should be included in some ultimate title compilation?

Every song needs to be Romanised so that it can be searched normally. If it's your song, give it a name, if it's not, that probably can't be universally covered by RC. These situations (as they virtually don't happen) would probably be treated case by case.

Adding additional Information seems redundant lol, if mappers/BN are unsure, they can ask Metadata QATs/Helpers for help like Modified Hepburn for Japanese.

CrystilonZ wrote:

泠鸢yousa - 没有名字的怪物 : Ling Yuan yousa - Shen De Sui Bo Zhu Liu
it has a mistake, should be:

没有名字的怪物 => Mei You Ming Zi De Guai Wu
神的随波逐流 => Shen De Sui Bo Zhu Liu

should delete "Word-by-word Romanisation" in Glossary.


Considering there are only 5 ranked maps(really a few) that using "ü" until now, and neither "v" nor "yu" isn't the best choice unless we allow ü in romanised field. There will be a metadata discretion by the Metadata Team on specific cases.

Agree tbh half way through writing that I realised this is redundant af XDD
Wikipedia kinda provides too much but eeh whatever I guess
and somehow I accidentally copied the wrong title lmfao good job me

@Fycho: We can't use the link provided due to this chapter.

Single meaning: Words with a single meaning, which are usually set up of two characters (sometimes one, seldom three), are written together and not capitalized: rén (人, person); péngyou (朋友, friend); qiǎokèlì (巧克力, chocolate)
etc.

This is what our draft suggested at first and what you argued against. I think this will just make it more confusing if you are supposed to ignore some sections of it.

Adjusted the draft and simply removed it. I don't think there needs to be any redundant information like modified hepburn for japanese, and most Chinese metadata songs are made by Chinese speakers in the game, they know how pinyin works. Whoever is confused on how to romanize Chinese could ask metadata QATs/Helpers directly without looking through the wall texts in Wiki painfully. Current rule has adequate explanation already.

Fycho wrote:

Whoever is confused on how to romanize Chinese could ask metadata QATs/Helpers directly without looking through the wall texts in Wiki painly.

Yeah, I agree with that. Following the wiki would even make you Romanise it differently than what is intended by the rule.

As there was, finally, an agreement on ü, is it still in discussion or why is it missing in the draft?

For the Japanese Romanisation, I think that giving link to Hepburn wiki overall is not the best idea as multiple Hepburn systems are mixed here. What about just linking the Modified Hepburn document? I think this is the best reference as it only says the rules of the Romanisation without redundancy + it's from Library of Congress, which is probably the most official reference we can have.

Suggestion to make the Romanisation rules a bit shorter and cleaner

First of all, for Russian, change "must be romanised using..." to "must use" as it is with other languages.

All the Romanisation systems, consistently, say "when there is no romanisation or translation information listed by a reputable source" and "The same applies to the Source field if a romanised Source is preferred by the mapper."

Assuming there will still be Korean (it should be because we include it as a language selection on the website), it would be messy to have this in every rule. What about making these rules and removing them from the rules of specific languages:

1. 1. official artist's Romanisations for all languages have priority
2. 2. if you choose (and as of now, you can choose) to use Romanised source, use the same romanisation method

There's no reason to specify the same thing for every language if it works uniformly.

Someone should give me the agreement on ü then

- will change the link
- will change russian wording,
- will avoid redundancy by just taking the parts that are redundant out and making them general rules for language specific romanisation works, right?

sth like

Okoratu wrote:

Romanisation is only to be used when there is no official translation or preferred romanisation provided by the artist. This applies to all fields that can hold romanised data by intent.

Seems about right, so now the confirmation about ü, and Korean Romanisation.

Maybe a good reference for Korean (should be the Revised Romanization of Korean, which seems to be used in most maps) might be this.

ü is the matter of preference now lol everyone probably has enough information to choose a side but I don't expect a 100 percent consensus
My suggestion about that is

one more point that I wish to bring up is
If the artist field contains artist names with internally conflicting naming conventions (first name - last name and last name - first name formats), they must be normalized to just use the same format throughout.
^ should specify which one is preferred for consistency.
also naming conventions (stuff) --> the stuff inside parentheses should be in the glossary lol
lastly please add this to the glossary

the answer to your specification question is neither
i'll apply the rest tomorrow if i can find what the fukc this means

Hi. I'm late...

About TV Size:
If we do decide to keep the TV Size label, we should probably set standards for other common markers related to song length such as Short Ver. The whole reason TV Size metadata ended up like it is was due to a short ver map actually. By the sounds of the discussion, we've already decided to stop looking for TV Sizes on official sites and be consistent, which is a step in the right direction.

Personally, I'm siding with dropping it into the tags. As mentioned above, we should also consider dropping Short ver (and any others that describe the length of a song) as well since they're essentially the same as a TV Size being special cuts and all. I don't see why TV Size should be the only one with special treatment when the idea as a whole should be related to all song cuts.

It would be really annoying without the label, for example when you map the TV Size and the Full version the mapsets merge together, Also if you're looking for a normal length song you are going to get a bunch of tv sizes or viceversa... and being honest people rarely care about tags, so dropping in to tags isn't going to work.

BTW what about using a single label for everything?

Can absolutely agree with Lanturn on this.

@Natsu If you add "tv size" to the tags and then search for a map and append "tv size", you should get the one that is TV Size (in game, website will show you probably both in both scenarios). There was also a suggestion that "TV Size" or basically "Short version" could be as an option to search on the website (or maybe just the length). I think that unification should be the last resort, there are way too many ways how to resolve this issue. Just showing the time on the website would be enough. Especially when there are maps that are "TV Size", but are ~30 sec. That's probably not what most people look for, most people probably imagine the standard 1:30 songs. The mystification is present both if you include unified tag or you just put it into the tags. Except the latter can lead to solving this issue entirely, rather than placing a bandage on it.

I'm of the opinion that displaying (TV Size) uniformly for all TV Size anime openings/endings would be much clearer to players searching maps of a song. It may take only seconds to check a single map to see what length it is, but what about when there's 5+ mapsets for a really popular song? Then you would have to check each individually to find what you're looking for instead of it being presented on the listing straightaway. People that have not seen TV Size in anime song titles in the past would not be likely to think to add it to their search terms. They'd probably be more likely to think something like, "theme song" or "opening" or "ending" or "short" if they're an English speaker, for instance. This can be seen by searching anime themes on YouTube and seeing how relatively rarely they use (TV Size) for their video titles.
However, if there were any way to have the length of a song displayed on a map's panel in the search listing, I'd totally agree with adding it to tags instead. But that's a website feature that would need to be considered separately...
And would also require begging peppy / flyte to add it

Also about what Lanturn brought up concerning making uniform tags for different types of length indicators like Short ver. Game ver. etc.: this sounds like a good idea, honestly. Then the main concern for metadata would be the accuracy of the actual main title, and not worrying about having to find out what particular variation of a label some obscure official source happens to use.

it can work either way

we'd just need to set a standard and stick to it